Wednesday, September 21, 2016

How does race affect copyrightable expression?

[P]laintiff argues that the “race
of the characters in the [Film] is irrelevant to the total concept and feel of
a film about relationships.” Plaintiff would be correct if the Film were just
about relationships. But it is not, and plaintiff’s say-so does not overwhelm
the plain meaning of the work. The Film depicts the protagonist’s journey from
a particular perspective: that of an African-American woman in a predominantly
African-American community. The Film repeatedly references and dramatizes
generations of African-American women, and in the background of one scene, the
observer hears an excerpt from a speech by Malcolm X to the effect that the
Black woman is the most “neglected” person in America. This all takes place against
what defendants accurately characterize as a “Southern Gothic feel.” The
settings transition between areas of New Orleans, the abandoned Fort Macomb,
and an Antebellum plantation. These significant differences in characters,
mood, and setting further distinguish the total concept and feel in the Film
from that in Palinoia.

In an opinion that goes from Voltaire to Taylor Swift to
Oscar Wilde to Andy Warhol (that last one is just showing off), the court
rejects the claim of substantial similarity between plaintiff’s 7-minute film
about the aftermath of a relationship and Beyoncé’s Lemonade
film and trailer. Here, enjoy some more
references from the opinion:

Plaintiff also argues that because
the works all “portray a struggle of a relationship; the reasons for such
struggle are unclear and irrelevant.” This is like saying that Casablanca, Sleepless in Seattle, and Ghostbusters
are substantially similar despite the different motivating forces behind the
struggles there portrayed (Nazis, capitalism, and ghosts, respectively). But “all
fictional plots, when abstracted to a sufficient level of generalization, can
be described as similar to other plots,” and that is why the differences do in
fact matter.

Creative Commons/disclaimer

Text on this blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License. Pictures and works quoted may be subject to other parties' copyrights.
I speak for myself. On this blog, I do not and cannot speak for Georgetown Law, the Organization for Transformative Works and/or AO3.